Farmers Movement Archive

Amendments in farm laws challenged in HC

Ahmedabad: A PIL in the Gujarat high court has challenged the changes made by the state government in agricultural laws that govern the functioning of the Agriculture Produce Marketing Committees (APMCs). The petition has been filed by former chairman of Khambha APMC, Premjibhai Senjaliya, through advocate Bhaumik Dholaria seeking removal of amended provisions by the state government in the Gujarat Agricultural Produce Marketing (Promotion and Facilitation) Act in 2020. It contends that agriculturists and APMCs have been aggrieved with amendment of sections 4(A) of 11, 27A, 31ZB, 10(2), 49A and 42B of the Act, which are in violation of the constitutional provisions. The petitioner has stated that the restrictions imposed on and curtailment of powers of committees of APMC by new amendments have taken away the regulation of marking of agricultural produce in market areas and their control has been limited to market yards only. The committees cannot take any action in case of malpractice in market areas by traders or middlemen. The PIL complains that the amendments have placed a total ban with respect to the borrowing capacity of APMC, except with the previous sanction of the director. They have restricted the legal remedy in civil court against any malpractice, the PIL alleged. The petitioner has contended that before the amendment in 2020, APMC committees functioned very smoothly, but their functioning has been adversely hampered due to the new provisions. This has affected tthe constitution of committees. This has also impacted the income of APMCs which was being generated in the nature of cess to the taluka market committees, and this would lead to closure of all taluka APMCs. The PIL also pointed out that powers of licensing authority vested with local APMCs till now have been taken away and invested with the director at state level. Affairs have become unmanageable at the state level. This is an act of usurping powers from the taluka- and district-level APMCs to govt officials and clearly infringes fundamental rights of committees, which are constituted by farmers’ representatives. The PIL has also taken exception to the restrictions imposed on a chairman and vice-chairman of APMC for holding the office of two terms and for keeping them away from office for next two terms. It said that similar changes were brought by the state government in cooperative laws in 1981, but the high court had quashed them in 1984. The PIL is likely to come up for the hearing after Diwali vacation.

The Times of India

2021-11-03

Ahmedabad